Register now to get rid of these ads!

Hot Rods Hairpins on a Model A rear

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Katuna, Nov 21, 2016.

  1. Katuna
    Joined: Feb 25, 2005
    Posts: 1,822

    Katuna
    Member
    from Clovis,Ca.

    I was looking for info on the H.A.M.B. the other day regarding running hairpins on a Model A rearend in a T Bucket. I came across a thread (which I can't seem to find now) that said that this was a no-no as the binding would bend the rods if not supported in the middle OR if supported, would probably break at the mounts.

    What I can't remember is if that applied to rearends only using the torque tube or would that apply to open drive too?

    I'm just in the doodling stages of building a Kookie style T and looking around the shop at the misc bits I have. I have a good Model A rear but the guy I got it from had torched the tube/shaft just behind the bones. Fortunately he had unbolted the bones first so they are usable. I was going to use a high arch spring. Since the tube is butchered I was going to convert it to open drive.

    So... good idea, bad idea or "are you f'n nuts!?!" idea?


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  2. mgtstumpy
    Joined: Jul 20, 2006
    Posts: 9,279

    mgtstumpy
    Member

    Open and closed drive move at transmission. Hairpins are too short with a different travel arc. Law of physics, something will break. Same principle with tube axle, it requires I beam to twist. Tube axle won't twist on its own axis
     
    Frank Carey likes this.
  3. Katuna
    Joined: Feb 25, 2005
    Posts: 1,822

    Katuna
    Member
    from Clovis,Ca.

    So, theoretically if the front pivot was on the same centerline as the front yoke, the arc would be the same, correct?

    I noticed that on the Kookie T Norm used the stock bones but hairpins on the front. My bones are in good shape so I could use those. I ***ume you would attach them on the trans mount near the output shaft?

    All this non-stock suspension stuff is foreign to me. Like I said, I'm just in the doodling stage. I have the coil spring setup to go with the rear hairpins but that would look like **** on a banjo rearend.


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  4. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 24,547

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    On a lot of those cars, they were so light that the "suspension" was a combination of ch***is flex, suspension link flex, and tire compression, especially in the rear.

    Not a good idea.

    Even on a properly suspended T-bucket, the rear end probably only really uses about 3" of suspension travel.

    You could do this:
    [​IMG]
    Just on your ch***is configuration. This is the proper way.
     
  5. alchemy
    Joined: Sep 27, 2002
    Posts: 22,774

    alchemy
    Member

    First question is: What transmission are you going to use? If you use an old Ford trans just find another torquetube and bolt em up. No splitting of wishbones required. Might need to shorten the torquetube though.

    If you want an open drive trans you will need to convert the rearend to open, and then you should still have your wishbones mount in the center. But you will also need another torque rod or two to add strength to the flimsy stock wishbones.

    Either way, be aware the Model A driveshaft is one piece all the way back through the pinion gear. Not as easy to work with as '32 and newer stuff.
     
  6. Katuna
    Joined: Feb 25, 2005
    Posts: 1,822

    Katuna
    Member
    from Clovis,Ca.

    Gimpy- That's what I was thinking of. Because of the short wheelbase I was thinking the 'pins would be long enough (there I go thinking again).

    I was going to run a flathead with sideshift Merc trans. It's an open drive so I was going to convert the rear. They make an app for that.


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  7. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 24,547

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    They can even be shorter, if they need to be.

    I put these:
    [​IMG]
    Under this:
    [​IMG]
    It goes pretty good.
     
    AHotRod, mad mikey and tfeverfred like this.
  8. tfeverfred
    Joined: Nov 11, 2006
    Posts: 15,788

    tfeverfred
    Member Emeritus

    Touche!
     
  9. chickenridgerods
    Joined: Jul 22, 2003
    Posts: 1,557

    chickenridgerods
    Member
    from DSM, IA

    Yes, but the axle pivots along more than one axis. The pivot point for the hairpins needs to be as close to the U-joint in the transmission yoke as possible to prevent binding and subsequent bending/twisting of the hairpin.
     
    need louvers ? likes this.
  10. Katuna
    Joined: Feb 25, 2005
    Posts: 1,822

    Katuna
    Member
    from Clovis,Ca.

    Like Gimpys pics, correct?


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    need louvers ? likes this.
  11. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 24,547

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    The ideal setup was indeed the torque tube. With the driveshaft inside of the main suspension link, it was virtually zero-bind. Everything was pivoting at one single spot, on all planes.

    Once the torque tube goes away, and you have addressed the suspension strength issue (eg: not running naked bones, solo), you introduce potential bind. The best way to address is to keep the suspension pivots as close to the u-joint yoke, on all planes. There is no easy way to make them dead-on, but as close as you can is best.

    The ladder bar setups that I posted do have some bind, but it is well beyond the point of normal useful suspension travel. Even the "shorty" set that I built for the '27 leave it with about 7" of travel. Plenty for anything but going off-roadin'.
     
    need louvers ? likes this.
  12. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 24,547

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Simply put, the farther apart the pivots are, the more bind you will have, and sooner.

    If you put your bones/hairpins/ladder bars on the outside of the frame rails, the only point at which they are not in a state of bind in when the car is sitting still, on level ground.

    Just because it was done all of the time in the past, and is still done today does not make it a good idea.

    You will find countless people that will tell you that "hot rods are supposed to ride like sh!t". You will find roughly the same number who have owned, or have ridden in, one that was built poorly.
     
    need louvers ? likes this.
  13. Katuna
    Joined: Feb 25, 2005
    Posts: 1,822

    Katuna
    Member
    from Clovis,Ca.

    I wasn't thinking of placing them outside the frame. I knew that was a big no-no.

    Definitely don't want a ****py riding car. I'd rather have a safe ride than smooth one although they should go relatively hand in hand.

    Now that I have a fairly decent grip on the rearend, let me open a new can 'o worms. I have a Speedway 6" drop tube axle (I hear the groans already) with hairpins and spring behind. I had bought in many years ago for a long gone project. It, along with the A banjo and the Bucket body is what got me to thinking about putting them together. Three former projects make one whole. I know the tube axles don't flex but on a short wheelbase, light weight car how much of an issue is this? I imagine if you don't build a super rigid frame, the frame is going to absorb a certain amount of flex. I don't plan on four-wheeling in this thing.


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  14. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 24,547

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    I'd sell off that axle and get a 4" Henry.
     
  15. alchemy
    Joined: Sep 27, 2002
    Posts: 22,774

    alchemy
    Member

    Just bolt the whole ch***is together with loose bolts and you won't have any problems at all.
     
  16. Katuna
    Joined: Feb 25, 2005
    Posts: 1,822

    Katuna
    Member
    from Clovis,Ca.

    Eureka! I'll just use lock nuts and leave them a little loose. Problem solved!

    Now why didn't someone come up with that solution earlier?

    Gimpy- My first choice would be an I-beam but I'm cash poor so I'm looking around at what I have. Doesn't mean I have to use what I have but would be nice to thin the herd AND build a roller at the same time.

    Screw it! I'll just slap it together and throw it on some RR site cl***ifieds. And a few bird**** welds and they'll eat it up.


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
  17. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 24,547

    gimpyshotrods
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    My concern with the combination of spring-behind-axle, and a 6" drop axle is that you will be prying road reflectors up with your drain plug.

    Or, you will have to raise the engine and transmission so far up into the ch***is, that you won't be able to see who is to the right of you, because you will be looking at the driveshaft tunnel.

    Sell that axle, and give Joe a call: http://www.joesspeedshop.com/joesproducts.htm
    "We can provide you with a dropped axle or we can drop your axle. Retail price to drop an axle is $200. Core charge for Model A is $50.00..."

    He's good people. The alignment on my axle from him was perfect. Looks good, too.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2016
  18. Katuna
    Joined: Feb 25, 2005
    Posts: 1,822

    Katuna
    Member
    from Clovis,Ca.

    Ha, don't think I haven't thought about that! However, most guys raise the spring mount on the frame to drop the front end. I can probably flush it with the bottom of the front x member.

    I know I can make this square peg fit in that round hole if I beat on it long enough.


    Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
     
    gimpyshotrods likes this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.